New light cast on post colonialism and post modernism

Interviewed by Ranga CHANDRARATHNE

Unlike in the past; modern readers, writers and critics have to live and understand new literary theories such as post colonialism and post modernism. What are these and why are they important for us to understand local and international literature? We interviewed Prof. Wimal Dissanayake, Hawaii-based academic and literary theorist on the current situation of these modern literary there. Excerpts of an exclusive interview with Prof. Dissanayake.

Prof. Wimal Dissanayake

Q: There are a lot of myths circulating around about concepts of literary theories such as post-colonialism and post modernism etc. We have observed that some of those who are hungry for new knowledge on literary theories even make Google searches to learn about Sri Lankan postmodern novels!

If one wants to understand a literary theory, is it good do a web search rather than reading or studying the texts to understand the boundaries and scope of new literary theories?

A: There is great deal of interest about post-modernism and post-colonialism not only in the advanced countries of the world but also in the so called developing counties as well. This is a good thing. However, it is important to acquire a deep understanding about these movements, if this interest is to be guided in fruitful directions. For this to happen, it is very important that we examine the original texts of leading theorists of post-modernism, post-structuralism and post-colonialism such as Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Jacques Lacan, Jean-Francois Lyotard, Frantz Fanon, Edward Said. Some of these texts are extremely complex and written in a forbiddingly demanding and turgid style. Much effort has to be extended in uncovering their preferred meanings.

Reading the Wikipedia or some introductions to these topics would not allow us to obtain a deep and full understanding of these movements. As a matter of fact, a superficial knowledge can lead to unfortunate situations. Clearly, a little knowledge can be dangerous. I have been teaching a course on post-modernism for many years, and I discuss chapters from the original texts with students, however convoluted and intricate the argumentation might be. So, the answer to your question is, if we are to acquaint ourselves with post-modernism, post-structuralism and post-colonialism comprehensively, we need to engage and understand the original texts. At a minimum, we need to have an intimate understanding of critical texts such as Derrida's "Of Grammatology", Foucault's "Discipline and Punish", Lacan's "Ecrit", Lyotard "The Postmodern Condition", Baudrillard's "For a Critique of the Political Economy", Frantz Fanon's "The Wretched of the Earth" and Edward Said's "Orientalism".

There are large numbers of introduction and student guides to post-modernism and post-structuralism and so on. Apart from untenable simplifications, in these woks, each of the authors has his or her take on the given topic.

It is far better to read the originals and form your own independent opinion on these topics. Another advantage of reading the original texts by Derrida or Foucault is that you develop an appreciation for the way each author constructs his argument, the rhetoric used, styles of presentation fashioned. All these aspects constitute vital facets of meaning and communication. Scanning the Internet, and reading basic guides is not adequate to arrive at a useful understanding of these complex concepts.

Q: We want to seek your wisdom on the two literary theories for Montage on post-colonialism and post modernism and first we want to focus on the scope and boundaries of post-colonialism.

How do you define post-colonial literature or post-colonial studies and who are the key actors in this fields and how and when did this theory come into being?

A: In order to understand the true academic space occupied by post-colonialism, we need to examine the discursive boundaries of post-modernism and post-structuralism which have influenced it.

Post-modernism and post-structuralism are very often used as interchangeable terms. This is because they share many features in common.

However, it is useful to make a distinction between these two creeds. Post-modernism as the term suggests is what came after modernism. The term modernism is extremely capacious and included a variety of traits and tendencies.

There are many modernisms. Industrialization, urbanization, the focus on the individual, secularism, rationality, the impact of science and technology are closely associated with modernism. Somewhere in the 1970s, modernism gave way to post-modernism.

This happened in the domain of architecture and very quickly, it began to influence, literature, arts, cinema as well as conceptual thinking.

Post-structuralism arose as a reaction to structuralism

Structuralism as a field of inquiry emerged out of linguistics and anthropology. The work of Ferdinand de Saussure, Claude Levi-Strauss, Roland Barthes, among others, is associated with structuralism. Some of the theorists who later became associated with post-structualism such as Foucault, Lacan, Barthes, earlier were interested in structuralism. While structuralists were after a kind of unitary meaning, post-structuralists valued pluralities of meaning.

Now, post-colonialism has been greatly influenced by post-modernism and post-structuralism. If we take the three most important theorists of post-colonial studies, Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak and Homi Bhabha, this fact becomes evident. Foucault had a great influence on Said's thinking. His magnum Opus "Orientalism" bears the indelible impress of Foucault. Spivak was heavily influenced by Derrida, She translated into English Derrida's important text "Of Grammatology" and her form of post-colonial reading is much indebted to Derrida. Derrida and Spivak were close friends. When I met Derrida in Hong Kong, a few years before his death, he spoke glowingly of Spivak. Homi Bhabha has drawn productively on the formulations of Lacan.

Post-colonialism is usually understood as a period marker "what came after colonialism. However, it is also a way of imagining, style of thinking and a set of reading practices. Post-colonial theorists seek to focus on problematic issues of representation, the interconnections between knowledge and power, as a way of reading texts produced in the former colonies. Edward Said's "Orientalism; can be regarded as a foundational text for post-colonial studies. In it, he focused largely on the Middle East and how it was misrepresented in the writings of Western scholars and writers. They are also interested in reading canonical western texts in the light of imperialism and colonialism. The writing of Said, especially his book "Culture and Imperialism", is important in this regards.

Q: In the book entitled The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-Colonial Literatures by three Australian academics Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin write: "We use the term 'post-colonial'... to cover all the cultures affected by the imperial process from the moment of colonization to the present day. This is because there is a continuity of preoccupations throughout the historical process initiated by European imperial aggression."

I don't agree with this broad and sweeping statement! What is your response?

A: "The Empire Writes Back" is an important book. It helped to generate a great deal of interest in post-colonial writings among university students. I know one of the authors, Bill Ashcroft. I have had many discussions with him. You are absolutely right. One of the main weaknesses of the book is that it tends to lump together all nations that once were under colonial rule. It is very important that we make distinctions among these nations in terms of topography, culture, power relations and so on. Without such finer demarcations, post-colonial studies will not have the desired effect.

The experience of New Zealanders, Nigerians and Indians in relation to the colonial masters was distinctly different. Another weakness of this book, which it shares with many other books on post-colonial theory, is the neglect of indigenous writings. The writing on post-colonialism is characterized by a virtual neglect of indigenous works. This is certainly a drawback. If we are to recognize and assess the full impact of colonialism, we need to focus on indigenous writings.

Let us take the case of Sri Lanka. If we are to make use of post-colonial protocols for cultural analysis, we need to pay attention not only Sri Lankan born writers of English works such as Michael Ondaatje, Romesh Gunasekera, Shyam Selvadurai, important as they are, but also, and more importantly, the writings of Piyadasa Sirisena and S.Mahinda during the colonial period, and the works of Martin Wickremasinghe and Gunadasa Amarasekera a in the post-Independence period.

Q: I have seen many references where post-colonial literature is also called "New English literature(s)" that examines a body of literary writings that reacts to the discourses and views of colonization and its impact. Would you please comment?

A: There has been a considerable body of writing produced on New English literatures. Champions of post-colonial theory have focused on these writings with great enthusiasm. It is indeed true that many of the works that fall under the rubric New English literatures can be examined productively using the styles and vocabularies of analysis associated with post-colonial theory. For example, if we take an Indian born writer, Amitav Ghosh, who displays great powers of creative intelligence and cross-cultural understanding, we can see the relevance and efficacy of post-colonial studies.

But once gain, I wish to return to the topic of indigenous writings. Post-colonial literature includes (if we are to confine ourselves to Anglophone countries) New English literatures as well as the vibrant body of vernacular writings. Let us take India.

There is no doubt that some extremely interesting work is being done in English, and it has begun to attract word-wide attention. At the same time, we must not forget that fact that an equally significant body of writing is produced in indigenous languages such as Bengali, Malayalam, Hindi and Marathi. We cannot afford to ignore this latter corpus of writing. Therefore, it is always useful to bear in mind the fact that while New English literatures need to be applauded and encouraged, we must not fall victim to the easy slippage between New English literatures and post-colonial literatures.

There is more to post-colonial literature than New English literatures. Part of the problem is that many of the scholars associated with post-colonial theory do not possess the linguistic competence to probe into indigenous writings.

Q: Edward Said who wrote his famous and controversial text entitled Orientalism (1978) is considered a seminal work in the field of post-colonial studies. What is this book and how important it is to study this work and understand its impact and trickle down effect into literature as this book also describes the binary between the Orient and the Occident? A: Edward Said's "Orientalism" is regarded as one of the most influential books published in the twentieth century. It has had a profound impact on literary scholars, anthropologists, political scientists, historians, practitioners of cultural studies and so on.

"Orientalism", which was published in 1978, is an exploration into the ways in which British and French colonial powers sought to represent, and really misrepresent cultures if the middle east and north Africa in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries as a way of controlling them. Drawing on the concept of discourse as enunciated by Michel Foucault and the interconnections, he established between knowledge and power, Said undertook this study opening up a new pathway of inquiry. Said's focus was on discursive operations and the intersections of language and forms of knowledge and colonial power.

Said pointed out how in these European writings, the Orient was turned into a caricature of itself. This line of inquiry had a great impact not only on scholars of the Middle East but also on scholars of South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, Latin America and so on. This book had a profound effect on shaping the new field of post-colonial studies.

As you rightly point out, Said's "Orientalism" has its own share of problems. I wish to call attention to a few of them. First, he seems to totalize the west and regard it as monolithic. Second, he does not pay adequate attention to the strategies of resistance fashioned by the colonized.

Third, he does not bring gender inequities sufficiently into the equation. Fourth, the problem of representation merits close analysis. This is a little more complex than the others. Said subscribes to a notion, quite rightly in my view, in which language constructs the realities we interact with.

However, when he talks about the orient being misrepresented, he is bringing into the discussion an extra-linguistic reality with which the linguistic reality is being contrasted. These are some of the weaknesses in this very influential book. However, in fairness to Said, it has to be recognised that he refined and fine-tuned some of these ideas in his later writings.

Earlier, we discussed the nature of post-modernism. There are a number of distinct features associated with it repudiation of totalizing narratives, rejection of reason as universal and foundational, centrality of language, problematization of representation, decentering the subject, focus on the nexus of knowledge and power, critique of Enlightenment, crossing of cultural borders, are among them. Post-colonial theorists such as Said paid close attention to many of these defining features.

(To be continued)